Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I laugh at everyone still holding out for Curry

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Calvin & Kevin View Post
    Works for me.
    I second that.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by tblain1 View Post
      So let me ask this... what will we pay stafford and how will he rank with QBs being paid in the NFL?
      The difference is quarterbacks are supposed to be the highest paid players on your team. With Stafford you're paying premium money for a premium position.

      If they took Curry #1 they'd be paying premium money for a non-premium position.
      Scott Wright, President
      Draft Countdown.com
      www.draftcountdown.com

      Twitter: twitter.com/DraftCountdown

      Draft Countdown Podcast, Every Tuesday at 8 PM EST
      www.blogtalkradio.com/draftcountdown and on iTunes

      Comment


      • #18
        So NFL.com's Steve Wyche is saying that instead of Stafford #1 we may want to do the opposite of what the Falcons did; grab the top LT and then a lower-ranked qb to finish off the first round. Seems like they're taking the Freeman-route. Thoughts anyone.

        Also: it's a great trade.

        Sig by Fenikz

        I remember NFLDC
        don't tell anyone, but Charlie Casserly is a dope fiend

        Comment


        • #19
          my problem is that there is one stafford and the tackles don't have as big of a separation between them. if we don't take stafford then it better be because we traded down or magically had sanchez fall 19 spots. i'm not comfortable with that kind of risk. and i'm not comfortable with freeman who i think it a couple years off and may never get it. we have the time to wait for freeman, but i think it sends the wrong message.

          as for next year, its a great DT/DE/OT class. if we get beatty then we can go for mccoy(DT) and greg hardy or whoever proves to be better than them next year. i'm a fan of taking one of those(DT/DE/OT) positions then filling out next year but then again we should just go BPA this year regardless.
          SCA Prowler is my Xbox Live Gamertag
          Fire Caldwell!!!

          Prowler's Newb Guide

          Comment


          • #20
            Jerry is NOT the DT for us. We just traded away undersized Corey Redding. I don't think Schwartz and Mayhew are lying when they say "size, size, size". They want DTs over 300 pounds.

            I wouldn't be surprised if we traded Backus, but i'd be less surprised if we traded Raiola. I'd love to trade Raiola to be honest, he's a good player but his lack of size/bulk/strength is a HUGE liability, especially when he's got to play the Williams wall twice, and pretty soon some massive green bay nose tackle lining up over him in a 3-4. Like BJ Raji.

            Comment


            • #21
              and alex mack there staring right at us if we wanted him this year.
              SCA Prowler is my Xbox Live Gamertag
              Fire Caldwell!!!

              Prowler's Newb Guide

              Comment


              • #22
                I really like the Peterson signing plus it got rid of Cory Redding ... He was just avg imo and for the top 5 DT $ he was gettting paid he needed to dominate. Just proof of another Millen mistake the new regime is being forced to deal with and get rid of to build a solid foundation.

                This Culter thing will not go away ... we'll see this week if he reports to Denver for workouts. Since Curry likely will not be our #1 what if McDaniels wants Stafford as his new pet project so we draft him and trade for Cutler, swap our #2's and we get Rey Maulauluga with Denver's #12 pick?

                That would be sick, Cutler as the Pro Bowl QB (only 25 yrs old!) and SLB Peterson, MLB Maulauluga, WLB Sims as the core of the D ... whoa, that is an upgrade!
                Last edited by SINCE1978; 03-15-2009, 09:40 AM. Reason: Cutler ...

                Comment


                • #23
                  I think theres a chance we pick up BJ Raji with the number 1 pick. I wouldn't like it but teams always do the unexpected in the draft.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    How many unexpected first picks happen?
                    Originally posted by SNIPER26
                    fwiw, i amz deunks ofs myt ass. ilo vez drinmoinz befotre i post. wha t a hreat ideas.z.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Scott Wright View Post
                      The difference is quarterbacks are supposed to be the highest paid players on your team. With Stafford you're paying premium money for a premium position.

                      If they took Curry #1 they'd be paying premium money for a non-premium position.
                      Exactly! Historically there are only 3 positions that have proved to be worthy of the #1 premium money associated with #1 and those positions are QB, LT, and DE.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by SINCE1978 View Post
                        I really like the Peterson signing plus it got rid of Cory Redding ... He was just avg imo and for the top 5 DT $ he was gettting paid he needed to dominate. Just proof of another Millen mistake the new regime is being forced to deal with and get rid of to build a solid foundation.

                        This Culter thing will not go away ... we'll see this week if he reports to Denver for workouts. Since Curry likely will not be our #1 what if McDaniels wants Stafford as his new pet project so we draft him and trade for Cutler, swap our #2's and we get Rey Maulauluga with Denver's #12 pick?

                        That would be sick, Cutler as the Pro Bowl QB (only 25 yrs old!) and SLB Peterson, MLB Maulauluga, WLB Sims as the core of the D ... whoa, that is an upgrade!
                        Does anbody else feel like McDaniels type of QB would be more of an accuracy/good decision guy more so then a gun slinger? I think this is where he'd rather have Cassell than Cutler and, IMO, he might rate Sanchez and Bradford higher than Cutler because he's a better system fit.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Sanchez isn't a great decision maker. I think people believe that notion because he doesn't do anything else really great, except play for USC.
                          Originally posted by SNIPER26
                          fwiw, i amz deunks ofs myt ass. ilo vez drinmoinz befotre i post. wha t a hreat ideas.z.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Saints-Tigers View Post
                            Who cares, you take the guy who you think is going to have the largest impact.



                            I'd do that, you don't get the chance to add an elite passer, and pass protector that often. Jerry isn't that young either, and will not be the impact player that someone like Smith or Oher could be.

                            Guys need to stop worrying about trying to plug needs on an 0-16 team, and just get the biggest impact players available at any position that isn't Calvin Johnson.

                            There will be other guys like Jerry every draft, you will have a shot at a top 5 type OT prospect at 20, either of these guys could be at the top of draft boards in a draft with less OT talent.
                            Great point.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Backus is better than any LT picked at 20 or after at least in 2009. Probably not 2010 and beyond but 2009 definitley. Rookie versus a guy with 100 starts. LG this year, LT next year, QB with Stafford and sit Stafford in 2009. No way we are good in 2009 no matter who we take number 1, so we need the QB of the future. Pick 20,33,65 and 82 should be BPA at defense or guard. Most likely defense.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Maybe Next Year Millen2 View Post
                                Backus is better than any LT picked at 20 or after at least in 2009. Probably not 2010 and beyond but 2009 definitley. Rookie versus a guy with 100 starts. LG this year, LT next year, QB with Stafford and sit Stafford in 2009. No way we are good in 2009 no matter who we take number 1, so we need the QB of the future. Pick 20,33,65 and 82 should be BPA at defense or guard. Most likely defense.
                                I disagree, in the past there have been impact rookies at LT that were picked after #20. Off the top of my head there was Marcus McNeil, Tony Ugoh, and Sam Baker(though Baker was injured for part of the year). IMO, there is a chance that an impact LT will be available at #20 based on the depth of this years class of LT following last yrs deep class.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information